Legal Opinion

Topeka Bridge & Iron Co. v. Board of County Commissioners

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided June 10, 1916No. 20,208PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Original proceeding in mandamus.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Porter, J.:

In this action the plaintiff seeks by mandamus to compel the defendant to carry out a contract for the erection of a bridge. In a former opinion (Bridge & Iron Co. v. Labette County, 97 Kan. 142, 154 Pac. 230), it was held that inasmuch as the remedy in an action at law is not fairly adequate, mandamus is a proper remedy. Because of the fact that defendant desired to aid the court in its solution of the question of law involved, by presenting testimony relating to reinforced concrete bridge construction, leave was granted to both *294parties to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Mazet v. City of PittsburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1890
  2. Fones Hardware Co. v. ErbSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1891
  3. People ex rel. Putnam v. Commissioners of Buffalo CountyNebraska Supreme Court · 1875
  4. City of Topeka v. McCabeSupreme Court of Kansas · 1909
  5. Topeka Bridge & Iron Co. v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1916

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dunn v. JonesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1936
  2. Eberhardt Construction Co. v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1917
  3. Lucas v. BowmanSupreme Court of Kansas · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API